Posted
by
ScuttleMonkey
on Wednesday December 19, 2007 @04:20PM
from the gutsy-moves dept.

sjvn writes "The official word will be out any minute now, but in the meantime DesktopLinux has learned that Dell will be releasing Ubuntu 7.10 on a laptop and desktop with immediate availability. And, as an extra added bonus, they're tossing in legal DVD-playback capability. In a word: Neat."

Post this in the firefox forums, but make sure you're running the latest version (the latest patch). It's a bug I encountered on one other site with popup menus not working. You can also order by phone.

I mean, honestly, you're making it sound like this is unbelievably hard work. We're talking about downloading a program that installs without any trouble at all, and "just works" when upgrading. It's going to take him all of one minute to go through the upgrade process, if that, plus whatever time it takes to download. Twice in two months? Most people spend more effort switching on their computers in the morning.

Upgrading software is a never ending story. It is very likely that his distro provides Firefox 2.x. It's just a matter of running the update program. Waiting for another release of Firefox doesn't make sense. Well, he can also wait for Firefox 4.x, 5.x, 6.x,...

Personally I think this story is barely newsworthy. It's the *same* models as previously announced but with an upgraded distro. It means they haven't scrapped it but they haven't expanded it either, and using the latest distro is hardly a surprise. In about 6 months you'll see a switch to Hardy Heron, but don't let me spoil the surprise (whoops, guess I just did). Now, if they decided to keep offering the old distro that'd be big news - see XP vs Vista.

Not off topic AT ALL. If Linux or for that matter Ubuntu is ever going to become mainstream this NEEDS to happen. DVD playback has been sore spot for Linux for several years, and while it's possible, from what I understand it's legality is somewhat questionable which is why most versions don't include it out of the box.

I haven't read TFA (been here a while). Is the DVD playback crippled? Will it refuse to skip previews and such? It doesn't sound like a fully functional DVD player would get the blessing, and the promise not to sue, from the MPAA.

Is the DVD playback crippled? Will it refuse to skip previews and such?

A DVD player that refuses to skip previews and such isn't crippled, it's working exactly as it's designed to.

I'm not saying that forcing you to watch commercials is a good thing, I think it's awful. But let's not act like players are supposed to completely ignore PUOs on DVDs, they're not. Those that do are the ones that aren't working as the specs detail they're supposed to, they just happen to be doing so in a manner that's conve

But let's not act like players are supposed to completely ignore PUOs on DVDs, they're not. Those that do are the ones that aren't working as the specs detail they're supposed to...

According to whom? If we're talking the UOP specification [wikipedia.org], I can't think of many end users that would AGREE to have their control taken from them. I'd also be willing to bet that if asked "Would you like to let the movie studio control what you watch on your legally purchased DVD, or would YOU like to choose?" darn near 100% of the users would indicate the latter. If you check the linked article above, pay close attention to the last sentence in the first paragraph.

I can't think of many end users that would AGREE to have their control taken from them.

Movie with loss of control, or no movie at all. What would most residential end users prefer?

I'd also be willing to bet that if asked "Would you like to let the movie studio control what you watch on your legally purchased DVD, or would YOU like to choose?" darn near 100% of the users would indicate the latter.

"Would you like to let the movie studio control what you watch on your legally purchased DVD, and in return have a wide selection of titles? Or would YOU like to choose and have only obscure films you've never heard of from countries you'll probably never visit?"

I can't think of many end users that would AGREE to have their control taken from them.

Movie with loss of control, or no movie at all. What would most residential end users prefer?

So if UOP became illegal, or for some reason impossible, or too difficult, then all of a sudden all of the movie producers will just pack up and go home and never create another movie again? I don't think so.

So if UOP became illegal, or for some reason impossible, or too difficult, then all of a sudden all of the movie producers will just pack up and go home and never create another movie again?

FBI warnings reduce the likelihood of an ignorance of fact defense, which could reduce the damages that the copyright owner can collect from convicted[1] infringers. If a publisher cannot give FBI warnings on a given home video format, it might significantly raise the price of titles in that format to compensate for the cost of lost opportunity for damages. And if this increased price is not profitable for a given title, the publisher might just not release it in that format at all, instead choosing to r

FBI warnings reduce the likelihood of an ignorance of fact defense, which could reduce the damages that the copyright owner can collect from convicted[1] infringers. If a publisher cannot give FBI warnings on a given home video format, it might significantly raise the price of titles in that format to compensate for the cost of lost opportunity for damages.

1) there is no reason the movie company can't display the FBI warning anyway.2) Everybody has seen the FBI warning. Most hundreds, maybe even thousands o

The annoying thing is they insist on showing (localized) copyright notices even in locales where ignorance of the law is not a valid defense. Besides that, skipping it means you have seen it at least once, as otherwise you wouldn't be wanting to skip it.

Like they never released any movies on VHS or Laserdisc because there wasn't any way to stop people from seeking.

VHS and other tape media never had random access, only fast play. Laserdisc already commanded a premium price that DVD generally does not match, especially after correcting for the increase in nationwide wages since the Laserdisc era.

I'd also be willing to bet that if asked "Would you like to let the movie studio control what you watch on your legally purchased DVD, or would YOU like to choose?" darn near 100% of the users would indicate the latter.

I'd be willing to bet that if asked "Would you rather go work and earn $100, or would you like to have it for free from UncleTogie's personal bank account?" darn near 100% of the people would indicate the latter.

Adding an anti-feature to a product is crippling, regardless if the anti-feature is written into the specification or not.

I'm not positive, but I think you have the definition of an anti-feature backwards. At first, I thought an anti-feature meant a bad feature, or a feature that hurts users. However, note the following from the linked article:

[The availability of RAW format images from a camera] is an example of an anti-feature. Anti-features are sold to customers as features but are fundamental or unavoid

I wish they cost less than a comparable windows system. They're acting like they are giving you a free OS, when they're really getting more money off of the Linux machines. Maybe they feel they incurred a greater cost finding and paying people that could support it? *shrug*
Might as well continue building my own.

I wish they cost less than a comparable windows system. They're acting like they are giving you a free OS, when they're really getting more money off of the Linux machines.

Major publishers of shareware pay home PC builders to get the unregistered versions of their products installed on the system before the end user first turns it on. Some Slashdot users have hypothesized that this makes up for the entire price of a high-volume OEM Windows license. The reason you don't get a discount on the PC with Ubuntu OS is that the shareware either isn't available for GNU/Linux (and doesn't run well in Wine) or has a Free counterpart that's as good or better.

If you seriously need a 15" monitor, you should get your eyes checked out. I'm posting this from my laptop with a 7" screen, and I don't really have to squint on this. Really, adding a bigger screen like that is just going to make the laptop bigger and heavier, and less appealing to carry around.

Gee, thanks for assuming to know how I prefer to use my computers better than I do. Excuse me for not preferring a pecker sized monitor like you.I guess your eyesight is just better than mine. Congratulations.

It never, ever ceases to amaze me how some idiots can't understand that people have different preferences, hence it might actually make sense for companies like Dell to give MORE choices to customers.

But hey, I'm glad you're happy with your laptop. I'm very happy with mine. It has a 17" display. Love i

It never, ever ceases to amaze me how some idiots can't understand that people have different preferences.

That was well said. Thas aside, small screens would also a problem for coders who absolutely need to multi-task, and whose productivity would be hampered if we couldn't fit multiple windows on the screen at the same time. Well, I guess I should just be writing code on 40 character lines; shame on me for being lazy.

"But hey, I'm glad you're happy with your laptop. I'm very happy with mine. It has a 17" display. Love it. Wish I could run Linux on it."
What's stopping you? Download Ubuntu and try the live CD, it won't cripple you.

Besides the DVD-playback, what is so important about this? Vista machines were available from day one of its release. No major OEMs are still selling Win2K. OEMs will always move on to the next OS offered by MS, Canonical, Ret Hat, Novell, etc. Ubuntu PCs being easier to find on Dell's site would be more newsworthy.

No, you can run an Nvidia card on FOSS drivers. You just won't get the full range of 3D capabilities that you would get with a proprietary driver. Of course, Ubuntu makes it easy to use the proprietaries, as it comes with them pre-loaded on the CD. So it's not a big deal to get them setup and loaded.Of course, if you are one of those purists who wants only FOSS software on your machine, I doubt very much you will be buying a Dell laptop anyway, so your opinion holds no weight.

Virtually any Dell PC you buy will come with proprietary software on it. After you turn on your Dell PC, a piece of proprietary software called "BIOS" sets the video adapter and much of the rest of the chipset into a known state, does some checks on your RAM, and loads GRUB.

So I went through and customized the same model with Windows Vista and with Ubuntu, to the same configuration (better LCD and larger battery, but otherwise stock). The Ubuntu model was roughly $854, and the Windows Model was roughly $824 (I might be off by a few bucks). But why is the Ubuntu model more than the Vista model?
grrr.

The Linux install is not subsidized with hundreds of badvertisement and spyware programs. You get a fixed, enhanced, tested Ubuntu 7.10 without any malware. To many people that's worth a lot more than Vista. Personally? I'd get the cheap Vista license and then replace the install with Ubuntu anyway, and then perform a ritual sacrifice to help a copy of Vista leave this world.